Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Bass bar tuning


Julian Cossmann Cooke

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, carl stross said:

Well, both him and Woodhouse are "highly respected" violin acoustics researchers depending on whom you're talking to and by that I mean their colleagues. :). I think he might be a competent physicist whatever that means, but in my opinion he hasn't yet figured out how violins work.

I'm not aware of anyone who can viably claim to have totally figured out how violins work. This doesn't mean that they have nothing to offer, or that we can't learn from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 282
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

18 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

I'm not aware of anyone who can viably claim to have totally figured out how violins work. This doesn't mean that they have nothing to offer, or that we can't learn from them.

Totally, not. But some of the big picture has been worked out and we can hear the result particularly with some violins coming from Germany, from two modern makers. In the same time equal or better violins are being made without the theory. The problem with "research" was that it picked up things which could be researched. Those were most of the time not the ones which mattered for the end user. :)  It seems to me that despite the ocean of papers, the impact of this research for the average good maker was almost zero. How much are you using ? :)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote
4 hours ago, carl stross said:

I know exactly what the function and working mechanism of the bass bar is.

Carl:

Would you please give me your explanation of the EXACT function of the bass bar and same for the working mechanism.  I've always thought of the bass bar as something that makes the top a more rigid piston at bass frequencies, thereby enhancing low frequency radiation.  Mechanism similar to that of a low frequency vented loudspeaker, described by the Thiele-Small equations, see http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/Sysdes/Thiel_small_analysis.htm .  Are your thoughts greatly different from mine?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Burgess said:

What cannot be researched?

Good question. :)  The general interaction with the player and to a much smaller extent, with the audience. The player has great latitude to compensate ( within reason ) for certain shortcomings. Wolfs would be a good example as a couple of the established workhorses are very wolfy. Response of the G string would be another, patches of deadness, false notes here and there etc etc . But a top player wants a violin which reacts expressively can't do much to overcome shortages there. But violin expression involves a myriad of variables we don't understand well, research is geared to show a clear result, in conclusion very little has been done there and what was done was not quite made public. That would be just one example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that reflects the function of the bar fully.

In my view, the bar is absolutely essential to the full functioning of the back. Without the stability it brings to the front, and therefore to the bass side of the bridge, the energy of the bow is dissipated, and fails to drive the post, and throw the back into action.

So when I make a bar, I try to visualise how the whole thing will work, and cut accordingly.

Edit.. Sorry, my post was a response to the front collapsing and neck falling posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Roger Hill said:

 

I can't quote your post but I'd say you have one third right. The 2nd third has just been touched by Connor Russel. I keep for myself the third bit but I doubt it'll take you more than a couple of minutes to work it out from the first two. :)   However, how to translate that into wood, escapes me and I was unable to come up with some sort of adjustment scheme either. Keep moving the sound post around a lot - with some luck you'll notice something. Now, get the top and the bar to behave like that with the sound post in standard position. That's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, carl stross said:

No need to apologize.:lol: I agree I am a troll as I enjoy provoking a reaction and watching what's happening. You on the other hand are an utter incompetent endlessly fishing for information on MN and almost never giving something in return. You are also pretty dismal as a physicist as we all enjoyed seeing a couple of times here. But I won't hold that against you. :lol: And what you're going to tolerate or not is your problem - I don't give a rat's arse as you're not even registering on my radar. Running short of meds AGAIN ?? :lol:  You've trolled my posts quite a few times, I am not going to put up with your senile bullshit anymore and I CAN do something about it. Never underestimate how small the world is.  Mind your crap, stop baiting my posts. I'm not selling anything and don't care of your opinions.

Your reply proves my point about you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, carl stross said:

Good question. :)  The general interaction with the player and to a much smaller extent, with the audience. The player has great latitude to compensate ( within reason ) for certain shortcomings. Wolfs would be a good example as a couple of the established workhorses are very wolfy. Response of the G string would be another, patches of deadness, false notes here and there etc etc . But a top player wants a violin which reacts expressively can't do much to overcome shortages there. But violin expression involves a myriad of variables we don't understand well, research is geared to show a clear result, in conclusion very little has been done there and what was done was not quite made public. That would be just one example.

These things can be researched, and are being researched.

"But a top player wants a violin which reacts expressively can't do much to overcome shortages there."

They most certainly can! Whether they want to or not might be a different matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Burgess said:

1. These things can be researched, and are being researched.

2. "But a top player wants a violin which reacts expressively can't do much to overcome shortages there."

Of course they can. Whether they want to or not might be a different matter.

1. Yes, they are but somehow more informally.... :)  And not by the usual culprits. :) The usual culprits tend to see violin research as an extension of their daily work.

2. Here, I'll stick to my opinion. I won't discuss specifics on an open forum but as an example look at sopranos. Many had a better voice than Casals, better technique etc. No expression. Dull as a plank. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, carl stross said:

I'd say you have one third right. The 2nd third has just been touched by Connor Russel. I keep for myself the third bit

If you read the page I offered you will note that the assumption is that the speaker box has rigid walls.  It is no great extension of the derivation to note that for the violin, at low frequencies the back also acts as a radiator, forming a dipole.  Same derivation applies, only with two speakers oppositely directed.  The rear speaker cone (usually on the back) as well as the front cone are driven  mechanically instead of electrically as with the loudspeaker. The analysis of the air motion is unchanged.  Now, I've got 2/3rds of the picture.  Would you please grace us with your EXACT explanation for the final third?  Inquiring minds want to know.........:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Roger Hill said:

If you read the page I offered you will note that the assumption is that the speaker box has rigid walls.  It is no great extension of the derivation to note that for the violin, at low frequencies the back also acts as a radiator, forming a dipole.  Same derivation applies, only with two speakers oppositely directed.  The rear speaker cone (usually on the back) as well as the front cone are driven  mechanically instead of electrically as with the loudspeaker. The analysis of the air motion is unchanged.  Now, I've got 2/3rds of the picture.  Would you please grace us with your EXACT explanation for the final third?  Inquiring minds want to know.........:D

Well, we all have secrets. :)  But I think you actually have it worked out and simply look for a confirmation. You're welcome to hate me but I think you are very competent and I doubt you reached a different conclusion than I. But it's three cones.... :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Burgess said:

Colin Gough is a rather highly respected violin acoustics researcher.

Agreed; his work is way up there.

However, some folks around here seem to confuse research of this sort with practical/useful information.  I haven't found anything useful in Colin's papers, but that doesn't mean they're not good as pure research.

5 hours ago, Michael_Molnar said:

I am intrigued that makers who fret over arching and graduations pay little attention to the bass bar. (Mea culpa.)

Violins don't have frets, and they certainly would not do well over the archings.

But really, in my case I want to spend my time on what seems to matter, and the bass bar (within reasonable bounds) hasn't seemed to be a high-gain knob to tweak.  That said... I do tend to go a bit stronger on the bar if the top is lighter than normal, and vice versa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carl stross said:

1. Yes, they are but somehow more informally.... :)  And not by the usual culprits. :) The usual culprits tend to see violin research as an extension of their daily work.

2. Here, I'll stick to my opinion. I won't discuss specifics on an open forum but as an example look at sopranos. Many had a better voice than Casals, better technique etc. No expression. Dull as a plank. 

 

1. Oh. From the preceding dialogue, I thought you were trying to offer an example of things which can't be researched. Backpedaling a little?

2. You're assigning that to a deficiency in the vocal instrument, rather than choice? If so, how did you reach that conclusion? By the way, most of us bring Casals to mind as a cellist, not a vocalist, although from the vocal standpoint, some interesting grunting comes across in some of his recordings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

1. Oh. From the preceding dialogue, I thought you were trying to offer an example of things which can't be researched. Backpedaling a little?

2. You're assigning that to a deficiency in the vocal instrument, rather than choice? If so, how did you reach that conclusion? By the way, most of us bring Casals to mind as a cellist, not a vocalist, although from the vocal standpoint, some interesting grunting comes across in some of his recordings.

1. No, not at all. But I won't be offering an example - that would inherently volunteer information I like to keep for myself. And as you surely know, Bruce Tai has done some sterling work. Not that many here payed any attention. 

2. Sorry David, I meant Calas not Casals. :)  Old age is catching up with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, carl stross said:

Totally, not. But some of the big picture has been worked out and we can hear the result particularly with some violins coming from Germany, from two modern makers. In the same time equal or better violins are being made without the theory. The problem with "research" was that it picked up things which could be researched. Those were most of the time not the ones which mattered for the end user. :)  It seems to me that despite the ocean of papers, the impact of this research for the average good maker was almost zero. How much are you using ? :)  

I wont discuss on your physics, which is from what I read yet mostly over trivialized combined with "this part is to complex to solve" not aware of its logica flaws, but thats my opinion and you dodged every single real discussion yet. 

I played quite some violins of those modern German makers. If you compare the early ones with the current ones you see the absolutly common improvement. If they understood more than others I would expect a higher improvement than others had. 

You cannot maesure them against others, but you can measure them against themselves and what I see doesnt convince me on this method beeing superiour, not at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Don Noon said:

But really, in my case I want to spend my time on what seems to matter, and the bass bar (within reasonable bounds) hasn't seemed to be a high-gain knob to tweak.  That said... I do tend to go a bit stronger on the bar if the top is lighter than normal, and vice versa.

Definitely not if you want the sound post in the usual position and doing it's usual things. :)  I install lower bass bars, flat topped. More constant in height. That makes for a pleasant lower register, easier to get going and appealing to my clientele... :) I wouldn't recommend it to you though. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...